jenga 2,998 Posted January 7, 2016 obviously a shortage already decent 3.00 riders, what happens next season when these riders become 3.10 , 3.50 etc will the rules change again ? don't think this was thought out personally I would have said, your no7 should be british and under 3.50 i agree with this post. but we will have to see after the 2016 season ends and see how far the goalposts move , again . why put things off today, when you can put them off tomorrow .. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sings4Speedway 3,249 Posted January 7, 2016 i agree with this post. but we will have to see after the 2016 season ends and see how far the goalposts move , again . why put things off today, when you can put them off tomorrow .. How far the goalposts move is anyones guess. If it was me running the show I would reset all the riders back to a flat 3.00 after their first season as it would be a learning / experience year then let them gain an average on year 2. Obviously those who flourished in the first year would be most desirable and those who struggled may be omitted for a new rider. That way it allows riders 2 years to see if they can make it & 2 years for the next crop to emerge. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
foamfence 2,917 Posted January 7, 2016 obviously a shortage already decent 3.00 riders, what happens next season when these riders become 3.10 , 3.50 etc will the rules change again ? don't think this was thought out personally I would have said, your no7 should be british and under 3.50 Then you'd probably be giving places to some who have never shown signs of going beyond that. Obviously the rules will change when the need arrises, much as has happened in the EL. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OILYRAG 86 Posted January 7, 2016 All the draft system does is create false averages. Take Richard Hall riding against these kids , he will get a false average of around 7 after 12 meetings and there is no way he is a 7 point rider and he will struggle when he moves into the team. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
szkocjasid 3,090 Posted January 7, 2016 I guessed that would be the case. But where is that replacement going to come from? Unless someone makes significant early strides in the National League, finding a rider close to being capable would be difficult. Do others like this rule? I can't make my mind up! It may be being introduced a bit too early as there just don't seem to be enough 3 pointers good enough to go round atm (especially if/when those injuries kick in). On the other hand, maybe that's the point - if they stay in the NL are they likely to progress and ever be good enough for PL? And if the idea is to improve young British talent, is there a danger that some might be way out of their depth and end up quitting altogether and being lost to the sport, or am I just being defeatist now? Thoughts? There's a few NL riders about who wouldn't be outclassed as replacements: Oliver Greenwood, Dan Greenwood, Ben Hopwood, Jake Knight, James Cockle, James Shanes, Tom Stokes, Danny Halsey (if he qualifies), Connor Mountain, Luke Priest! 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
screm 8,067 Posted January 7, 2016 All the draft system does is create false averages. Take Richard Hall riding against these kids , he will get a false average of around 7 after 12 meetings and there is no way he is a 7 point rider and he will struggle when he moves into the team. Agreed it was probably against higher standard of rider, but Hall didn't exactly pull up any trees last season at reserve, he has a low average for a reason. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ecksact 14 Posted January 8, 2016 There's a few NL riders about who wouldn't be outclassed as replacements: Oliver Greenwood, Dan Greenwood, Ben Hopwood, Jake Knight, James Cockle, James Shanes, Tom Stokes, Danny Halsey (if he qualifies), Connor Mountain, Luke Priest! I don't know which team you follow, but I would hardly be over-excited at the thought of signing any of these guys! Dan Greenwood's actual PL average last season was 1.66 (from 13 meetings). Some might be worth a shout, I grant you, but you didn't say where you stand on the rule? I made my position clear - I'm sitting on the fence!:-P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baba 562 Posted January 13, 2016 Edinburgh still looking for a big rabbit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenga 2,998 Posted January 13, 2016 There's a few NL riders about who wouldn't be outclassed as replacements: Oliver Greenwood, Dan Greenwood, Ben Hopwood, Jake Knight, James Cockle, James Shanes, Tom Stokes, Danny Halsey (if he qualifies), Connor Mountain, Luke Priest! JAMES COCKLE you are havin a larf !!! Edinburgh still looking for a big rabbit. get up in the early mornings , there,s always plenty about... eat , drink , chew . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
arnieg 3,662 Posted January 13, 2016 JAMES COCKLE you are havin a larf !!!.Well he has the experience, he was number 7 in the PL before... ...for Reading Racers... ...in 2004!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewy 2,338 Posted January 13, 2016 He was no 7 for plymouth a few years ago aswell in the pl Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheScotsman 2,484 Posted January 13, 2016 Did he not ride for Glasgow too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fromafar 10,408 Posted January 13, 2016 Averages are killing the sport,that will always be my view. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DW 11 Posted January 14, 2016 Did he not ride for Glasgow too? Glasgow bought him from Rye House, might still own him! So called, ahem "legend killer", who had the habit of falling off when coming under pressure. Wouldnt be eligible for PL no 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheScotsman 2,484 Posted January 14, 2016 Thanks DW. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
